Hello,

I went through Elfs with a very harsh pen today.

1. Degrees of success are to be handled differently. From now on, one success is sufficient to perform an action. Further degrees of success permit more extravagant descriptions.

2. Dumb Luck is slightly rewritten to de-emphasize the "intent" in the announcement process, and to permit a little more improv in the description of the outcome. Not much different, though.

3. I removed a few snipes at old-school role-playing. They were fewer and milder than I thought, based on various emails I've received bemoaning them in the past, but I got rid of them anyway. The original idea was a double-sarcasm - here I am making fun of Trope X, but then the Elfs rules goes ahead and celebrates it, so that's funny, right? That kind of humor is way too subtle for a game text.

4. The Stages rules are totally re-written. They're still there, but now their original purpose - to spoof alignment - is far better met. The idea is that no elf is forced to act in any particular way, but if he doesn't conform to his Stage in any particular scene, then once per session another player can tattle on the player to the GM, and gain a one-roll bonus by doing so.

The Stages' connections to rolls is now gone; the only bit that remains is that on a full failure (0 successes), Stage may be taken into account as part of the description of the screwup.

5. I hunted high and low for any reference to or implication of nonconsensual sex whatsoever, and found absolutely none. It remains mysterious to me that some people insist that Elfs includes it.

6. I plan to include a map of Nerth and a few scenario-map pieces for Ice and Fire, if I can get them.

Comments? Suggestions? Ideas? All appreciated.

Best,
Ron

So, is this a 2nd Edition, or something that those of us who already have a copy of Elfs can get?

All the revisions sound good -- I remember the system seemed a little clunky in actual play, and I like the idea of streamlining and emphasizing the intent.

Hi Kirt,

Edition, schmedition. It's a print copy of the game, just like the other one is a PDF copy. The edits and changes are plain old what they are. I hate the terms "revised," "updated," and editions of all kinds.

Anyway, I think people who bought the PDF deserve a little break, but how much is a good question. If we consider the full $10 to be a pre-payment, then there will be literally no profit for me, or even worse.

What do you all think of knocking the $20 price down to $15 for people who bought the PDF? Actually, what you all think is of minor interest, because I'm 99.9% sure that's what I'll do.

Best,
Ron

Hi Ron,

By one-roll bonus, do you mean +1, or does it depend on how much the GM likes the ratted tidbit?

Also, I would guess that the only penality the rattee suffers is humiliation?

Hi Alan,

Yeah, it's just a +1 to the target number of the tattler's next roll. And also yeah, no particular penalty to the tattlee in mechanics terms.

The idea is to spoof the common 1970s-80s application of the alignment rules in AD&D: "You can't do that! That's not your alignment! GMmmmmm, he's doing it again!" 'Cause, you see, it never stopped anyone from doing it, get it? Like that.

Best,
Ron

Ron,

I like the proposed adjustments, particularly for Stage. Tattling to the GM should be much fun. :-)

A question regarding the "Do PDF owners get a discount?" issue. Would it be possible to issue a one or two page summary sheet, detailing just the rules changes? On the one hand, this might cut into sales a bit. However, if there is enough value added in the print copy, it shouldn't hurt too much. Besides, with a little creativity, you could style the rules summary as system upgrade info a la D&D 3.5 and get in another dig at D&D.

You could even call it "Elfs 3e".....

Seth Ben-Ezra
Great Wolf

Hey Ron,

The idea is to spoof the common 1970s-80s application of the alignment rules in AD&D: "You can't do that! That's not your alignment!..."

Alignment arguments were never about personal gain. They were, and probably still are, about making sure the other guy isn't playing so singlemindedly to the game's reward system that his advancement might outpace your own.

For a truer spoof, consider problematizing character advancement:

Whenever a player has made his tenth kill, or wants to spend 100 coins on advancement, he announces it. "That's ten baby! I'm levelling up." And in response, any other player who wishes to do so can bitch to the GM. "Are you going to allow that? He's the worst Anal I've ever seen. Remember when he stole the sacred yam, and the guards were searching for it? He hid it in a hay bale!" A bitch must cite a specific incident of failed attention to Stage.

At that point, the player who wanted to level up is prevented from doing so until they demonstrate their Stage in play. Or alternately, the player can bitch back to the GM about the poor attention to Stage of the other player, citing a specific incident. This "deflects" the scrutiny of the GM, so the character can level up as normal. The downside being that a player cannot again use that specific incident to problematize the other guy when he wants to level up.

Paul

Hi there,

Seth, I think a freebie rules-intro is a great idea, but the real hassle is writing and formatting and uploading it. I'd love some help from someone in doing that. Also, in my experience, such an offering (especially with a single illustration) never threatens sales; it enhances them considerably.

Paul, I think your idea may reflect perhaps (1) too much work for the sake of a point-by-point accurate satire, and (2) a bit of your own personal experience rather than a general point. I like Elfs just referencing the issue and moving on, with only minor effects on play, rather than recapitulating every detail of the pain as a form of fun (that's Hackmaster's job).

For those who don't know, Paul's pent-up bile regarding his AD&D2 experiences in the 1980s are only matched by Josh Neff's bile regarding playing White Wolf games. If you're ever feeling down, just email one of them and say the name of the company/game (no "hello" or "how are you" necessary), and enjoy the responding rant. You'll feel better about your own play history.

Best,
Ron

Hey all,

Even if Ron doesn't use it; this:

Whenever a player has made his tenth kill, or wants to spend 100 coins on advancement, he announces it. "That's ten baby! I'm levelling up." And in response, any other player who wishes to do so can bitch to the GM. "Are you going to allow that? He's the worst Anal I've ever seen. Remember when he stole the sacred yam, and the guards were searching for it? He hid it in a hay bale!" A bitch must cite a specific incident of failed attention to Stage.

I removed a few snipes at old-school role-playing. They were fewer and milder than I thought, based on various emails I've received bemoaning them in the past, but I got rid of them anyway. The original idea was a double-sarcasm - here I am making fun of Trope X, but then the Elfs rules goes ahead and celebrates it, so that's funny, right? That kind of humor is way too subtle for a game text.

Speaking of ripping extra body orifices, that's exactly what'll start happening if you pugslies keep using the term "discount."

It's not a freakin' discount. It's a pre-payment. This isn't word-spinning; it's a straightforward and highly defined difference between the terms.

Grrr!
Ron

I am so there for this one. I've been wanting this game in print ever since I did the sheet for it. I can do a map for you no problem.

-- Ben

Awesome, Ben. I'm looking for a map of Nerth - doesn't have to be too detailed, but it should totally be a "typical fantasy game map." See the text for place-terms.

Also, I think the castle descriptions in Ice & Fire are pretty detailed, but write to me at sorcerer@sorcerer-rpg.com if you have any questions.

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: Speaking of ripping extra body orifices, that's exactly what'll start happening if you pugslies keep using the term "discount."

Ron,

I like the idea of making it really clear what you’re up to with the alignment spoofing. I think the things you’ve mentioned make that more clear, and I can tell you, I think it’s useful. I’ll be the first to admit that it went right over my head when I read Elfs, so here’s one guy who could use the extra explanation. Jeez Ron, we don’t expect subtle satire in our roleplaying games. We’re reading game rules. We’re in literal mode.

Or at least I am. Maybe I’ve revealed too much?

Rich

All right, we have Mr. Literal Rich on the one hand and Mr. Subtle Raven on the other. You see what I have to deal with? You see?

Anyway, now that I know that the revised text will please no one (probably), we're all set. Layout is under way and the printer is ready, so expect a new Elfs in a couple of months.

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: Anyway, now that I know that the revised text will please no one (probably), we're all set. Layout is under way and the printer is ready, so expect a new Elfs in a couple of months.

Hell man, I already know that.

1. A review on RPG.net references a "gang bang" scene in one of their games involving the Ice & Fire character Lusciossa. The implication, if I'm not mistaken, is that the event was consensual; note as well that no such behavior is present in the actual text of the adventure.

2. Various insta-reactions to the review interpreted and re-stated the in-game event as gang rape, with attendant cries of horror and disgust at a game which includes such things.

3. The alleged gang rape was then cited as a part of the published rules in later discussions here at the Forge about what sort of character behavior the Elfs rules did or did not incite.

At which point I throw up my hands. "Gamers."

Best,
Ron